Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Incest

JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!
bulproof
Posts: 25,284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:25:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!

Believers love incest, it's there favourite pastime.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:50:28 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
God didn"t kill Cain for killing Abel but yet after the flood there was a new covenant (agreement between God and Noah and Noah"s subsequent children) that those who take another"s life their life shall be taken. The Garden started with an agreement with Adam and Adam"s subsequent children, that didn"t include anything about killing, or any thing about what today is called incest.

Back in Abraham"s day there was no agreement between him and His God in reference to incest until the Lord God addresses the issue to some extent in the law that was given by the hand of Moses.

The Israelites are in a agreement with the Lord their God, and the Christian community is in a agreement with the same God via Jesus Christ.

If you are not in the same agreements then what is your problem. Should the Russians think and live like you because you think yourselves to be wonderful? Or Africans, or Asians.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 3:51:05 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Let me also point out that it had to happen not once, but twice. According to the Christian holy book we all came from Adam and Eve, and then from Noah and his immediate family. We should all have virtually identical features, considering the narrow nature of our supposed originators genetic variety. Still waiting for an answer for that one, among others.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:02:01 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!

Any animal breeder can answer that question for you.

The chances of defects in a first level incestuous conception are very slim indeed.

Every generation makes sure that the chances get less and less.

Stop and think.

It is widely agreed that two cousins marrying and having children are completely safe from problems.

How soon would Adam and Eve's descendants have been able to marry cousins, or second cousins or third cousins, each step away from incest being safer than the previous one?

No, for the short time for which incest was necessary, it was no threat, especially with Jehovah there to make sure it wasn't a problem.

That is why Jehovah didn't trouble about it until he created Israel as a holy nation.
The same could not be said for such as the Pharaohs, who as good as insisted in incest so as not to water down the Royal Blood.

Even the Royal families of Europe are closely related to each other with the blood of "commoners" being avoided wherever possible.
bulproof
Posts: 25,284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:05:17 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:02:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!

Any animal breeder can answer that question for you.

The chances of defects in a first level incestuous conception are very slim indeed.

Every generation makes sure that the chances get less and less.

Stop and think.

It is widely agreed that two cousins marrying and having children are completely safe from problems.

How soon would Adam and Eve's descendants have been able to marry cousins, or second cousins or third cousins, each step away from incest being safer than the previous one?

No, for the short time for which incest was necessary, it was no threat, especially with Jehovah there to make sure it wasn't a problem.

That is why Jehovah didn't trouble about it until he created Israel as a holy nation.
The same could not be said for such as the Pharaohs, who as good as insisted in incest so as not to water down the Royal Blood.

Even the Royal families of Europe are closely related to each other with the blood of "commoners" being avoided wherever possible.
And this is science straight out of the Mother Goose book, you can take that as gospel. hahahahaha
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:11:20 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Incorrect and irrelevant. With only 2 parents any bad traits would only multiply as you keep breeding it back in. Get some basic genetics.
chucklehead
Posts: 44
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 4:59:19 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!
...we do have Neanderthal DNA ...
..noah's known world flood was likely localized in Mesopotamia ...
...and in some instances , incest is possible .. mutations .. gotta love those fused chromosomes .
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 5:04:24 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:59:19 PM, chucklehead wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!
...we do have Neanderthal DNA ...
..noah's known world flood was likely localized in Mesopotamia ...
...and in some instances , incest is possible .. mutations .. gotta love those fused chromosomes .

It says all this in the "good" book.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2016 5:37:28 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:50:28 PM, DPMartin wrote:
God didn"t kill Cain for killing Abel but yet after the flood there was a new covenant (agreement between God and Noah and Noah"s subsequent children) that those who take another"s life their life shall be taken. The Garden started with an agreement with Adam and Adam"s subsequent children, that didn"t include anything about killing, or any thing about what today is called incest.


Back in Abraham"s day there was no agreement between him and His God in reference to incest until the Lord God addresses the issue to some extent in the law that was given by the hand of Moses.

The Israelites are in a agreement with the Lord their God, and the Christian community is in a agreement with the same God via Jesus Christ.

If you are not in the same agreements then what is your problem. Should the Russians think and live like you because you think yourselves to be wonderful? Or Africans, or Asians.

If you believe all that garbage to have any veracity, you will believe anything!
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2016 8:12:27 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 3:51:05 PM, dhardage wrote:
Let me also point out that it had to happen not once, but twice. According to the Christian holy book we all came from Adam and Eve, and then from Noah and his immediate family. We should all have virtually identical features, considering the narrow nature of our supposed originators genetic variety. Still waiting for an answer for that one, among others.

That is not entirely true.

The children of Noah's sons and wives were already 1 generation removed. Therefore you are talking of cousins marrying not Brothers and sisters, and that means no incest. We have not been left with any indication of exactly how many children were born to Noah's three sons, or to their descendants.

Also, humans have adapted to their environments just as animals have. Where they were in the hot sun a lot, those who developed the ability to produce melanin, and therefore tan easily, became the most successful humans, leading to an increase of prevalence of dark skins. Even now, many "darker races" pale when they spend enough time in less sunny climates. I know because I have seen living proof of that in my future wife. She is a Filipina, who, whilst working as a maid in the Lebanon, lost a lot of her colour. In the three years she has been back to the Philippines she has regained a lot of it, probably all since her colour now matches that of her sister again.

The chances are that the "White races" are simply coloured races that have lost their colour over the centuries. Hence we can still go a pleasant shade of brown, some more than others, when exposed to sunlight.

Since childhood, long before I had actually even seen a coloured person, I have thought it ironic that many prejudiced people go on holiday to try and obtain precisely the colour they are prejudiced against. To me colour prejudice smacks of jealousy.

"All men living today belong to a single species, Homo sapiens, and are derived from a common stock. . . . Biological differences between human beings are due to differences in hereditary constitution and to the influence of the environment on this genetic potential. In most cases, those differences are due to the interaction of these two sets of factors. . . . Differences between individuals within a race or within a population are often greater than the average differences between races or populations.""An international body of scientists convened by UNESCO, quoted in Statement on Race (New York, 1972, third ed.), Ashley Montagu, pp. 149, 150.

"A race is simply one of the partially isolated gene pools into which the human species came to be divided during and following its early geographical spread. Roughly one race has developed on each of the five major continental areas of the earth. . . . Man did indeed diverge genetically during this phase of history and we can measure and study the results of this divergence in what remains today of the old geographical races. As we would expect, divergence appears to be correlated with the degree of isolation. . . . When race formation took place on the continents, with the bottlenecking of thousands of populations in isolated gene pools all over the world, the gene-frequency differences we now see were established. . . . The paradox which faces us is that each group of humans appears to be externally different yet underneath these differences there is fundamental similarity." (Heredity and Human Life, New York, 1963, H. L. Carson, pp. 151, 154, 162, 163) (Thus, early in human history, when a group of people were isolated from others and married within the group, certain distinctive combinations of genetic traits were emphasized in their offspring.)

Being children of God is not something that we imperfect humans are entitled to by birth. But we are all the offspring of Adam, who when created in perfection was a "son of God.""Luke 3:38.

Acts 10:34, 35: "God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him."

John 3:16: "God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life." (Exercising genuine faith in him is necessary in order for any of us to attain to the kind of relationship with God that Adam lost. That privilege is open to people of all races.)

1 John 3:10: "The children of God and the children of the Devil are evident by this fact: Everyone who does not carry on righteousness does not originate with God, neither does he who does not love his brother." (So God does not view all humans as his children. From a spiritual standpoint, those who deliberately practice what God condemns have the Devil as their father. See John 8:44. However, true Christians reflect godly qualities. From among these, God has selected a limited number to rule as kings with Christ in heaven. These are referred to by God as his "children" or his "sons." For further details, see the main heading "Born Again.")

Rom. 8:19-21: "The eager expectation of the creation is waiting for the revealing of the sons of God . . . The creation itself also will be set free from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God." (Relief for mankind will come when "the sons of God," after receiving heavenly life, are "revealed" as taking positive action on behalf of mankind under the direction of Christ. After faithful ones on earth [referred to as "the creation" in this scripture] have attained to human perfection and have demonstrated unshakable loyalty to Jehovah as Universal Sovereign, then they too will enjoy the fine relationship of children of God. People of all races will share in this.)

To those who would be his true disciples, Jesus said: "All you are brothers." (Matt. 23:8) Later he added: "By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.""John 13:35.

Despite human imperfections, that sense of oneness was a reality among early Christians. The apostle Paul wrote: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one person in union with Christ Jesus.""Gal. 3:28.

Christian brotherhood unmarred by racial distinctions is a reality among Jehovah"s Witnesses in the 20th century. Writer William Whalen said in U.S. Catholic: "I believe that one of the most attractive characteristics of [the organization of Jehovah"s Witnesses] has been its traditional policy of racial equality." After making an extensive study of Jehovah"s Witnesses in Africa, Oxford University sociologist Bryan Wilson stated: "The Witnesses are perhaps more successful than any other group in the speed with which they eliminate tribal discrimination among their own recruits." Reporting on an international gathering of Witnesses from 123 lands, The New York Times Magazine said: "The Witnesses impressed New Yorkers not only with their numbers, but with their diversity (they include people from all walks of life), their racial unself-consciousness (many Witnesses are Negroes) and their quiet, orderly behavior." Galatians 5:21-26.

Soon God"s Kingdom will destroy the present ungodly system of things, including all who do not genuinely love both Jehovah God and their fellowman. (Dan. 2:44; Luke 10:25-28) God"s Word promises that the survivors will be persons "out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues." (Rev. 7:9) Drawn together by worship of the true God, by faith in Jesus Christ, and by love for one another, they will truly make up a united human family. ( Reasoning book Pp. 300-301 WTBTS "Races of Mankind". http://wol.jw.org... (Edited to fit available space).
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2016 8:15:00 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/21/2016 4:05:17 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:02:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!

Any animal breeder can answer that question for you.

The chances of defects in a first level incestuous conception are very slim indeed.

Every generation makes sure that the chances get less and less.

Stop and think.

It is widely agreed that two cousins marrying and having children are completely safe from problems.

How soon would Adam and Eve's descendants have been able to marry cousins, or second cousins or third cousins, each step away from incest being safer than the previous one?

No, for the short time for which incest was necessary, it was no threat, especially with Jehovah there to make sure it wasn't a problem.

That is why Jehovah didn't trouble about it until he created Israel as a holy nation.
The same could not be said for such as the Pharaohs, who as good as insisted in incest so as not to water down the Royal Blood.

Even the Royal families of Europe are closely related to each other with the blood of "commoners" being avoided wherever possible.
And this is science straight out of the Mother Goose book, you can take that as gospel. hahahahaha

Actually no it comes from my knowledge of genetics, and animal husbandry.

Do you even know what "Gospel" means?

It means "Good News".

Careful, your ignorance is showing - again.
bulproof
Posts: 25,284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/23/2016 1:35:10 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/22/2016 8:15:00 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:05:17 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/21/2016 4:02:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 1/21/2016 3:14:08 PM, JJ50 wrote:
Why is it that incest was apparently rife in the book of Genesis and looked upon favourably by the deity, but subsequently became a BIG NO NO for very good reasons? The Biblical literalists might like to try to explain that one!

Any animal breeder can answer that question for you.

The chances of defects in a first level incestuous conception are very slim indeed.

Every generation makes sure that the chances get less and less.

Stop and think.

It is widely agreed that two cousins marrying and having children are completely safe from problems.

How soon would Adam and Eve's descendants have been able to marry cousins, or second cousins or third cousins, each step away from incest being safer than the previous one?

No, for the short time for which incest was necessary, it was no threat, especially with Jehovah there to make sure it wasn't a problem.

That is why Jehovah didn't trouble about it until he created Israel as a holy nation.
The same could not be said for such as the Pharaohs, who as good as insisted in incest so as not to water down the Royal Blood.

Even the Royal families of Europe are closely related to each other with the blood of "commoners" being avoided wherever possible.
And this is science straight out of the Mother Goose book, you can take that as gospel. hahahahaha

Actually no it comes from my knowledge of genetics, and animal husbandry.

Do you even know what "Gospel" means?

It means "Good News".

Careful, your ignorance is showing - again.

Seriously, you're dumb enough to be a jehovian I don't know why they won't let you back in.
hahahaha
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin